I think overall the book (Evil Under The Sun) was better than the Peter Ustinov & David Suchet version combined. I have yet to have seen an adaptation of the book that I'm totally satisfied with, but I will say that that Peter Ustinov version did get some aspects of the characters and story that I prefer better than the Suchet version.
I found this site by putting in the search words -'Poirot Appointment with Death farcical', and got just what I wanted - other people who have noticed how some adaptations of Agatha Christie's novels are just awful. For me, 'Appointment with Death' was the catalyst because we have 2 DVD versions, both of which I watched recently. This led me to read the book, again, after decades. Neither version is particularly accurate, but the David Suchet version is by far the worst. The nun seeking white slaves - totally, totally ridiculous!!! I think that she (the nun) also refers to the King James Bible - meaning that she can't possibly even be Catholic - allegedly being Polish, that's the only type of Christian she would be... The child abuse bit - done to the extreme and also not even in the book. And the ending... dear oh dear.....
I haven't read most of the books for many, many years, and so can't comment on the accuracy of other novel versions. Others here do a good job of that. I do say, however, that I didn't like the Suchet version of 'Murder on the Orient Express', either.
Welcome @VeritasCVP! Appointment With Death was such a departure of the book I don't even know why they put so much effort in allowing the film to stray so far from the original material when they could have just stuck to what Agatha Christie which was a whole lot better! And don't get me started on the Murder On The Orient Express film!
I think the best episodes from the end period of Poirot when they decided to go in a new direction in the series were Five Little Pigs, The Hollow, Sad Cypress, After The Funeral, and Halloween Party ----these are the ones that comes to mind to me at the moment.
I did like ITVs Mrs McGinty's Dead, Cat Among The Pigeons, Death On The Nile and The Clocks, I also disliked Appointment With Death with a Passion but not as much as Cards On the Table
I didn't care much for Death On the Nile. I think the film could have been a whole lot better. I did like Mrs. McGinty's Dead and Cat Among the Pigeons. I haven't seen The Clocks yet. Cards On The Table had the potential to be good but alas, they failed at that.
I rather liked Cat Among the Pigeons. They didn't stray to far from the book, and what they did change made sense.
In the book Miss Springer is shot dead in the Sports Pavilion whereas in the film she is killed by a javelin. I think it would have made more sense on screen to have the means of Miss Springer being killed by a gun instead of a javelin being thrown at her and actually hitting the target.
I lijke Cat among the Pigeons adaptation. It's very well-done and the changes don't undermine the story. Unlike Cards on the table, Appointment with Death (I really didn't understand the changes, why they did it?), Curtain and others that make me sad and angry.
Absolutely. That was the one deviation from the book that I really hated. Even the scene preceding the killing of Prince Ali and Bob Rawlinson at the beginning was muted. Not only was the spear killing sensational and totally unnecessary, I gave the film a dimension of horror which was totally inappropriate to the story. In general, Agatha Christie's books are "entertainment". They are appropriate for people of almost all ages, and usually not the kind to provoke nightmares or terrors. Murders usually happen "off-screen", rarely even heard (and when heard, sometimes it's a red herring!). When the villians are cought by the law, we usually don't hear about their fate (rarely about a death sentence carried out - I can only think of one case, MM's "Christmas Tragedy"). In the new movies there is a lot more violence, a lot more graphic horror and a many more indications of future executions. To me it seems a pity.
Absolutely. That was the one deviation from the book that I really hated. Even the scene preceding the killing of Prince Ali and Bob Rawlinson at the beginning was muted. Not only was the spear killing sensational and totally unnecessary, I gave the film a dimension of horror which was totally inappropriate to the story. In general, Agatha Christie's books are "entertainment". They are appropriate for people of almost all ages, and usually not the kind to provoke nightmares or terrors.
You took the words right out of my mouth! Earlier today I drafted a post, saved it and was going to post it after someone said something about the javelin scene in the film. Here is what I said:
I felt that it was too much like something you would see in a horror film today. The javelin being thrown was more of a horror-film inspired death that someone like Wes Craven or John Carpenter would do rather than what Agatha Christie would do. Agatha Christie wrote mystery, suspense and some supernatural stories. And with her supernatural stories there were never any deaths that were sensational and full of bloody violence. It wasn't the kind that would make you uncomfortable and uneasy, making you squirm in your chair because it was full of blood, gore, and violence. It was the kind of supernatural that made you turn you head around to make sure no one was behind you.....the kind that would give you goosebumps.
Murders usually happen "off-screen", rarely even heard (and when heard, sometimes it's a red herring!). When the villains are caught by the law, we usually don't hear about their fate (rarely about a death sentence carried out - I can only think of one case, MM's "Christmas Tragedy"). In the new movies there is a lot more violence, a lot more graphic horror and a many more indications of future executions. To me it seems a pity.
In the new films there is not just graphic horror and violence but sexual scenes. If you watch the new version of And Then There Were None, there were graphic bloody scenes and sexual scenes that were totally unnecessary and un-Christie-like. I couldn't even finish the film because it didn't respect the material. In the Geraldine McEwan version of The Murder At The Vicarage, there was a scene when Leonard Clement discovers Mrs. Protheroe and Lawrence Redding in the shed and Mrs. Protheroe runs out with half her clothes on. Mrs. Lestrange looks out her window and says, "Is he [Lawrence Redding] doing Mrs. Protheroe too? Quite a busy boy with his brush." Not something that Agatha Christie would have allowed her characters to say. The graphic horror, violence, bloody scenes, and sexual scenes and innuendos....it seems to be the trend these days for these Agatha Christie adaptations.
@Tudes: I was a little disappointed with Curtain (the film). I felt like it could have been a whole lot better and if the film was a little longer I think that would have been a plus as well. I did love the use of Chopin's 'Raindrop Prelude' (Op. 28 No. 15) at the beginning of the film -- it was a fitting piece for this melancholic, poignant episode.
To add onto what I said about Curtain a little earlier, I think what made the film wanting were the performances of its actors..... or should I say underdevelopment. When I look at other films like Five Little Pigs, The Hollow or even the earlier episodes like Peril At End House and Hercule Poirot's Christmas I felt satisfied with the acting. In other words I got a sense of who the characters were and each one of them stood out....you can pinpoint a characteristic from each one of them and see something that sets them all apart. I didn't get that in Curtain as much. Maybe I need to watch the film again because it has been a while since I last seen it. I think the two performances that I liked were from Alice Orr-Ewing who played Judith Hastings and Helen Baxendale as Elizabeth Cole.
I was disappointed Curtain wasn't filmed where The Mysterious Affair At Styles was and it is a shame the Adaptation was so drk and if my memory serves me right low lit, I know Poirot dies ut the Adaptation could have been a little litghter as a way of sain thankyou to the fans who like the lighter ones for their continueing support and apilogies for the change of tempo.
This particular clip is from Curtain and I loved the light-heartedness between Poirot and Hastings in this scene even though there was a sad tone to it but the rapport between them reminded me of the older Poirot episodes. But then Poirot began from being light-hearted to getting really, really dark in his character and mood.... too dark in which it looks like we saw a whole different Poirot, the one from Murder on the Orient Express which I just didn't like. I only read the book once but does anyone remember the book having a dark tone to it (besides it being sad and nostalgic)?
I too wished Curtain was filmed where The Mysterious Affair At Styles was back in the 90's. Would have been nice to have some consistency. Wonder why they couldn't film at the original location. Does anyone know?
@ChristieFanForLife - I think that most of the problem with the episode of Curtain was the overall melodramatic tone about the production in general, including the marketing and discussions before it was even shown on television. Like an unnecessary dark cloud hanging over the whole thing, and it set the stage for a disappointing work. The book Curtain is not that bad, and I don't have much patience with the people who become maudlin over Poirot's last episode and death or Suchet's last performance as Poirot (I believe he even filmed Dead Man's Folly last so that Curtain wouldn't be such a depressing experience). The way they change everything in these adaptations, I'm surprised they didn't cut out the death part and marry Poirot off instead. It seems every storyline is fair game in these rewrites.
But on a more interesting note, I see that Orient Express and Death on the Nile are your top two dislikes in the filmed versions. I would have ranked them as my top favorites. First of all, the book Orient Express is one of my favorites, and while I agree that the story was changed, it didn't seem to me to be all that bad. I enjoyed the adaptation, although I am not a fan of Suchet's performances as Poirot in general. Also, I thought Death on the Nile was very enjoyable and well done, with a few exceptions in the storyline (Allerton, for example, and Ridgeway's cocaine). I was happy to see that the characters weren't cut as they were in the 70's version, and I would have a hard time saying which version I prefer of the film, with Ustinov or Suchet, although I would probably lean towards Ustinov because of the better cast. The Suchet version was truer to the book, and I realize that was easier said than done given all the characters and sub-plots.
@ChristieFanForLife - But on a more interesting note, I see that Orient Express and Death on the Nile are your top two dislikes in the filmed versions. I would have ranked them as my top favorites. First of all, the book Orient Express is one of my favorites, and while I agree that the story was changed, it didn't seem to me to be all that bad. I enjoyed the adaptation, although I am not a fan of Suchet's performances as Poirot in general. Also, I thought Death on the Nile was very enjoyable and well done, with a few exceptions in the storyline (Allerton, for example, and Ridgeway's cocaine). I was happy to see that the characters weren't cut as they were in the 70's version, and I would have a hard time saying which version I prefer of the film, with Ustinov or Suchet, although I would probably lean towards Ustinov because of the better cast. The Suchet version was truer to the book, and I realize that was easier said than done given all the characters and sub-plots.
I greatly disliked Orient Express because they took one of the best Poirot books and just ruined it. I didn't care much for the cast members either and they made Poirot's character all dark and gloomy. I much prefer the 70's version though I didn't care much for Albert Finney as Poirot but the overall production was a whole lot better than the Suchet version.
What makes Death on the Nile with Suchet so bad in my opinion (maybe not as bad as Orient Express) is the acting and I think Emma Griffiths Malin who played Jacqueline de Bellefort could have added a little bit more spice to her performance and Emily Blunt as Linnet Ridgeway as well. What made the 1970's version work was that the run time was a whole lot longer (the film was well-paced), whereas the Suchet film lacked that luxury (poorly paced) and it's a shame because Death On the Nile was one of Agatha Christie's longer books and the story is like an"event"; this is a big story--and though the Ustinov one cut out some of the characters I would say that it didn't harm the story or made me miss those subplots that much. If the Ustinov film didn't omit some of the characters and a number of subplots, the film would have been longer than it was. I think what the film did was "simplify" whereas in the Suchet version the characters remain but overall I don't feel like I got to know them. You get a brief sketch of them and that's merely it. For a story that has such rich characterization there is just no excuse not to flesh them out a bit. The Suchet version may have been more truer to the book in some ways but the overall execution of the film was poorly done. I'm all for a faithful adaptation but the scenes and the acting has to be executed well and I think the Ustinov version excels in that. Maybe if David Suchet filmed both of these stories in the 90's when the series was at its peak, there is a possibility they would have been filmed better.
What I dislike so much about MOTOE Adaptation is SPOILER ALERT 1 Suspect is omitted and The Doctor is a Suspect and The Denoumont is rushed and the end is odd.
I like how the 1974 MOTOE adaptation ended. The clinking of the glasses, the little celebrations and toasts were appropriate with the brutal nature of the crime all caused by Samuel Ratchett (Cassetti)
I liked both versions of Death on the Nile, actually, and thought that there was sufficient excellent detail in the original writing to allow and guide the actors as to how to really get into character. This is the best novel for character range, in my view. Both Jacquie's i thought were good - Mia Farrow because she was clever and sharp as the character - and slightly fey. The other later actress conveyed the affection for the cad really well. The attic scene at the end was very good - it showed the simple life they could have led. The cads were brilliantly acted, but I think that many male actors do find that sort of part quite easy to capture - especially if they are good-looking charming types themselves.
I also like both versions. Although I prefer the first one. The actors are much better than the second version, for instance. But I think it's a good version (the second one). Of course, I prefer Suchet as Poirot. I think the worst one is Cards on the Table. Everything is awful. A marvelous story was turned into a disgusting tv movie. So sad.
I agree, @ChristieFanForLife . If they think they're so much better than her, it would be easier to write their own story instead of messing her stories up. Someone should tell them that they´re not better than her. So, please, be faithful to the book!
@tudes, that's why Agatha Christie is called Queen of Mystery for a reason and the screenwriters are not. I would hate to see a completely original story idea from them. Their "original idea changes" from these so-called Agatha Christie adaptations are not even good.
My favourite episode is Murder in Mesopotamia! It's clever, emotional, funny and heart-rending for me. The book is really great and adaptation is well-done. Other great episodes are Evil under the Sun (better than Ustinov version for me), The Mystery of the Blue Train (there are very good actors), After the Funeral (better than book), Hickory Dickory Dock (it's so funny!) or Five Little Pigs (it's credible and so sad). From short episodes is my favourite The Disappearance of Mr. Davenheim, The Mystery of Hunter's Lodge, The Dream or The Yellow Iris. I think worse episodes are The Big Four, Death in the Clouds, The Clocks or The Mysterious Affair at Styles (sorry!).
I agree that Five Little Pigs brought some depth to the characters. Elspeth Greer came across convincingly, I think, and, of course, the visual form was able to do justice to a very visual novel: the powerful painting; the strong sunlight; the visual presence of the wife, Caroline; the herbs and plants; the views; Elspeth's featureless sitting room when she is older and settled.
Comments
For me, 'Appointment with Death' was the catalyst because we have 2 DVD versions, both of which I watched recently. This led me to read the book, again, after decades. Neither version is particularly accurate, but the David Suchet version is by far the worst. The nun seeking white slaves - totally, totally ridiculous!!! I think that she (the nun) also refers to the King James Bible - meaning that she can't possibly even be Catholic - allegedly being Polish, that's the only type of Christian she would be...
The child abuse bit - done to the extreme and also not even in the book. And the ending... dear oh dear.....
I haven't read most of the books for many, many years, and so can't comment on the accuracy of other novel versions. Others here do a good job of that. I do say, however, that I didn't like the Suchet version of 'Murder on the Orient Express', either.
In general, Agatha Christie's books are "entertainment". They are appropriate for people of almost all ages, and usually not the kind to provoke nightmares or terrors. Murders usually happen "off-screen", rarely even heard (and when heard, sometimes it's a red herring!). When the villians are cought by the law, we usually don't hear about their fate (rarely about a death sentence carried out - I can only think of one case, MM's "Christmas Tragedy"). In the new movies there is a lot more violence, a lot more graphic horror and a many more indications of future executions. To me it seems a pity.
I felt that it was too much like something you would see in a horror film today. The javelin being thrown was more of a horror-film inspired death that someone like Wes Craven or John Carpenter would do rather than what Agatha Christie would do. Agatha Christie wrote mystery, suspense and some supernatural stories. And with her supernatural stories there were never any deaths that were sensational and full of bloody violence. It wasn't the kind that would make you uncomfortable and uneasy, making you squirm in your chair because it was full of blood, gore, and violence. It was the kind of supernatural that made you turn you head around to make sure no one was behind you.....the kind that would give you goosebumps.
In the new films there is not just graphic horror and violence but sexual scenes. If you watch the new version of And Then There Were None, there were graphic bloody scenes and sexual scenes that were totally unnecessary and un-Christie-like. I couldn't even finish the film because it didn't respect the material. In the Geraldine McEwan version of The Murder At The Vicarage, there was a scene when Leonard Clement discovers Mrs. Protheroe and Lawrence Redding in the shed and Mrs. Protheroe runs out with half her clothes on. Mrs. Lestrange looks out her window and says, "Is he [Lawrence Redding] doing Mrs. Protheroe too? Quite a busy boy with his brush." Not something that Agatha Christie would have allowed her characters to say. The graphic horror, violence, bloody scenes, and sexual scenes and innuendos....it seems to be the trend these days for these Agatha Christie adaptations.
I was disappointed Curtain wasn't filmed where The Mysterious Affair At Styles was and it is a shame the Adaptation was so drk and if my memory serves me right low lit, I know Poirot dies ut the Adaptation could have been a little litghter as a way of sain thankyou to the fans who like the lighter ones for their continueing support and apilogies for the change of tempo.
This particular clip is from Curtain and I loved the light-heartedness between Poirot and Hastings in this scene even though there was a sad tone to it but the rapport between them reminded me of the older Poirot episodes. But then Poirot began from being light-hearted to getting really, really dark in his character and mood.... too dark in which it looks like we saw a whole different Poirot, the one from Murder on the Orient Express which I just didn't like. I only read the book once but does anyone remember the book having a dark tone to it (besides it being sad and nostalgic)?
I too wished Curtain was filmed where The Mysterious Affair At Styles was back in the 90's. Would have been nice to have some consistency. Wonder why they couldn't film at the original location. Does anyone know?
1. Murder On the Orient Express
2. Death on the Nile
3. Appointment With Death
4. Cards On The Table
5. Evil Under The Sun
The top 5 best Poirot's would be:
1. The Mysterious Affair At Styles
2. The ABC Murders
3. Five Little Pigs
4. Peril At End House
5. The Hollow
But on a more interesting note, I see that Orient Express and Death on the Nile are your top two dislikes in the filmed versions. I would have ranked them as my top favorites. First of all, the book Orient Express is one of my favorites, and while I agree that the story was changed, it didn't seem to me to be all that bad. I enjoyed the adaptation, although I am not a fan of Suchet's performances as Poirot in general. Also, I thought Death on the Nile was very enjoyable and well done, with a few exceptions in the storyline (Allerton, for example, and Ridgeway's cocaine). I was happy to see that the characters weren't cut as they were in the 70's version, and I would have a hard time saying which version I prefer of the film, with Ustinov or Suchet, although I would probably lean towards Ustinov because of the better cast. The Suchet version was truer to the book, and I realize that was easier said than done given all the characters and sub-plots.
What makes Death on the Nile with Suchet so bad in my opinion (maybe not as bad as Orient Express) is the acting and I think Emma Griffiths Malin who played Jacqueline de Bellefort could have added a little bit more spice to her performance and Emily Blunt as Linnet Ridgeway as well. What made the 1970's version work was that the run time was a whole lot longer (the film was well-paced), whereas the Suchet film lacked that luxury (poorly paced) and it's a shame because Death On the Nile was one of Agatha Christie's longer books and the story is like an"event"; this is a big story--and though the Ustinov one cut out some of the characters I would say that it didn't harm the story or made me miss those subplots that much. If the Ustinov film didn't omit some of the characters and a number of subplots, the film would have been longer than it was. I think what the film did was "simplify" whereas in the Suchet version the characters remain but overall I don't feel like I got to know them. You get a brief sketch of them and that's merely it. For a story that has such rich characterization there is just no excuse not to flesh them out a bit. The Suchet version may have been more truer to the book in some ways but the overall execution of the film was poorly done. I'm all for a faithful adaptation but the scenes and the acting has to be executed well and I think the Ustinov version excels in that. Maybe if David Suchet filmed both of these stories in the 90's when the series was at its peak, there is a possibility they would have been filmed better.
What I dislike so much about MOTOE Adaptation is SPOILER ALERT 1 Suspect is omitted and The Doctor is a Suspect and The Denoumont is rushed and the end is odd.
I think the worst one is Cards on the Table. Everything is awful. A marvelous story was turned into a disgusting tv movie. So sad.
I think worse episodes are The Big Four, Death in the Clouds, The Clocks or The Mysterious Affair at Styles (sorry!).